In traditional doctoral education, the written text has long stood as the principal medium for presenting and evaluating knowledge. A PhD thesis is typically a lengthy monograph, and indeed academic conventions have placed prose at the centre of scholarly communication for centuries. There are practical and historical reasons for this text-centric tradition. Written documents are tangible, archivable, and have long been seen as the clearest way to demonstrate rigorous analysis and argumentation. However, the dominance of text is increasingly being questioned in an era of digital media and diverse literacies. Researchers now ask whether confining doctoral work to linear writing might overlook other valid ways of constructing and conveying knowledge.
The case for multimodality in research communication
PhD research often engages with phenomena that are not solely textual. Educational theorists observe that the world researchers study is inherently “visual, aural, tactile, multimodal, multidimensional, and polysemic” (Andrews et al., 2012). Yet the communication channels of academia have remained predominantly text-based, creating a disconnect between scholarly expression and the richness of the subject matter. In response to this tension, the University of Edinburgh’s Manifesto for Teaching Online makes a provocative declaration. It states that “text has been troubled: many modes matter in representing academic knowledge” (Bayne et al., 2016). This statement captures a growing recognition that scholarly knowledge need not be confined to words on a page.
Multimodality means using multiple modes (such as images, sound, video, or interactivity alongside text) in concert. Adopting a multimodal approach offers opportunities to represent research in forms more closely aligned with the nature of the evidence or ideas under study. Importantly, digital technologies have lowered many barriers to incorporating such modes. Today’s doctoral students can easily record high-quality audio or produce videos. They can also create interactive data visualisations or websites, and seamlessly integrate these into their research outputs. Therefore, there is a compelling case that expanding beyond text can enrich academic communication. Different modes may illuminate different aspects of a problem, and thus lead to new insights.
Pioneering multimodal dissertations
A number of trailblazing PhD projects have demonstrated the potential of moving “beyond the text” in doctoral scholarship. One notable example is the work of Nick Sousanis, who completed his Columbia University doctorate entirely in comic-book form. Titled Unflattening, his graphic dissertation was later published by Harvard University Press (Sousanis, 2015). The project defied conventional scholarly form. Instead of chapters of prose, Sousanis presented his arguments through sequential art. He combined images and text in a visual narrative.
Reviewers noted that Unflattening is simultaneously a scholarly inquiry and a work of art. One reviewer praised it as “a stunning work of graphic art and a serious inquiry into the ways humans construct knowledge” (Marshall, 2015). This groundbreaking example challenges assumptions about what a doctoral thesis can look like. The dissertation exploited the collage-like capacity of the comics medium to explore concepts about perception and learning in ways that a purely textual argument might not easily achieve.
Another pioneer of multimodal doctoral work is James Lamb, who completed a PhD at the University of Edinburgh by blending traditional writing with digital media content. Lamb’s thesis research on technology and learning spaces involved ethnographic data, and he wanted to convey certain aspects of that data that would be flattened in a purely written description. These aspects included the sounds and visual observations he had recorded. He integrated interactive audio-visual components into the dissertation by means of QR codes linking to online content (Lamb, 2019). For instance, readers scanning these codes could listen to ambient sound recordings from the study spaces. They could also view short videos and annotated images that accompanied the text’s analysis. In this way, Lamb’s work allowed multiple modes – sound, image, and text – to dialogue together, each mode contributing something to the argument that the others could not.
He emphasises that he did not undertake this approach as a gimmick or mere experimentation. Rather, it was the most appropriate way to present his findings about sound and physical space (Lamb, 2019). The digital form in his case enabled a better alignment between content and form. This outcome illustrates what theorist Gunther Kress calls the “aptness of mode” (Kress, 2005).
Lamb did face the challenge of satisfying university formatting regulations and disciplinary expectations while pursuing a non-traditional format. He solved this by embedding digital media via QR codes alongside a printable narrative. This was something of a compromise to meet institutional requirements, yet it succeeded in producing a richly multimodal thesis that pushed at the boundaries of the conventional dissertation format (Lamb, 2019).
These examples emerge from fields like education and the arts. They underscore that a doctoral thesis can be more than a bound volume of text, and they hint at the diversity of approaches possible. One can imagine, for instance, a PhD in music presenting its findings partly through composed audio pieces. Alternatively, a design PhD might include an interactive exhibition as part of the dissertation. Indeed, universities are beginning to see creative practice doctorates and alternative thesis formats. These formats incorporate creative works, performances, or digital artefacts accompanied by analytic commentary. The early multimodal dissertations serve as proofs of concept that rigorous scholarship can be communicated in multifaceted ways. This can be achieved without any loss of intellectual depth.
Opportunities and benefits of multimodal scholarship
Embracing multimodal forms in doctoral work offers several potential benefits. First, it allows the form of the dissertation to better follow its function. By choosing media and modes that fit the subject matter, researchers can convey nuances that might be lost in translation to text. For example, a scholar of architecture could include rich visual renderings or walk-through videos of virtual spaces to complement a textual analysis of design principles. Doing so gives the reader (or viewer) a more immediate understanding of the spatial qualities being discussed. Likewise, an education researcher investigating classroom discourse might present short video clips or audio snippets alongside commentary. This way, tone, gesture, and other contextual features are directly appreciable rather than only described. In such ways, a multimodal dissertation can enable more holistic communication of research findings.
Second, multimodal dissertations can engage audiences beyond academia more effectively and make research outcomes more accessible. A video, podcast, or interactive webpage can often reach and resonate with people who might not read a dense academic paper. In the context of open scholarship, a PhD project that includes, say, an online resource or documentary may have a life beyond the library shelf and foster broader impact. This does not mean compromising complexity, but rather translating insights into additional representational forms. As one proponent argues, the aim is to communicate research in the language most suited to the ideas. Doing so can enhance clarity and even reveal new perspectives on the topic (Kress, 2005).
Doctoral students who venture into multimodal terrain often report new benefits. The creative process of designing non-textual components can lead to fresh analytic questions and a deeper understanding of their own data (Lamb, 2019). The critical thinking involved in deciding how to encode an argument in image or sound can be generative, pushing researchers to consider their material in new lights.
Furthermore, early evidence suggests that innovative dissertation formats can garner recognition. In a recent study of graduate students who produced multimodal dissertations in education, many participants reported positive outcomes. These included winning awards and even securing grants related to their work (Tran, 2019). These accolades indicate that the scholarly community is starting to value such innovations.
A well-crafted multimodal project stands out as original, which can be advantageous in competitive academic job and funding markets. There is also a broader pedagogical benefit. By expanding what counts as legitimate scholarly output, institutions encourage the development of diverse skill sets in PhD candidates. Creating a multimodal thesis requires not only domain expertise but also skills in design and media production, and it often demands collaboration with others – for instance, working with technical support or artists. These skills are increasingly relevant in a digital knowledge economy. In this sense, encouraging multimodal scholarship at the PhD level can prepare researchers to communicate and collaborate in a variety of contexts. This readiness applies to academic settings and beyond.
Challenges and considerations
For all its promise, the move toward multimodal doctoral work comes with significant challenges. The most immediate are institutional and infrastructural. University regulations on theses have traditionally assumed a print-centric model, with strict formatting rules that do not readily accommodate videos, interactive media, or audio files. Many PhD candidates who attempt non-traditional formats find they must negotiate ad hoc solutions to fit their work into existing guidelines. For example, Lamb used QR codes to incorporate digital content while still satisfying the submission rules. Such workarounds can be effective, but they highlight the need for graduate schools to update policies.
A few universities have begun to develop formal policies for alternative dissertation formats or to accept supplemental digital materials. However, these practices are not yet widespread. Navigating this landscape demands extra effort and careful planning from students and supervisors to ensure the final submission meets official requirements.
Another challenge lies in evaluation. Academics are trained to evaluate written arguments. By contrast, they may feel less confident assessing the scholarly merit of non-traditional components. For example, how should one judge a documentary film or a set of musical compositions as part of a dissertation? Clear criteria and guidelines need to be established for multimodal components. For instance, examiners might be instructed to consider the intellectual content conveyed by those components. They should also evaluate how effectively each piece supports the overall argument.
Some institutions now include additional examiners with relevant expertise (e.g. in design or media) when assessing an unconventional thesis. Ensuring a fair assessment is crucial so that students are neither penalised for being innovative nor given a free pass on rigour. This requires a cultural shift in academia to acknowledge that serious scholarship can take non-traditional forms. As the literature on multimodal research notes, the scholarly community must develop new literacies to engage with such work critically. Scholars need to learn to “read” a combination of media with the same attentiveness traditionally reserved for text (Andrews et al., 2012).
Technical and practical issues also pose difficulties. Digital media can become obsolete (file formats change, links break, platforms disappear), raising concerns about the longevity of a multimodal thesis. University libraries and archives, which preserve dissertations, are now grappling with how to store interactive or multimedia elements in the long term. Students must often curate their work carefully to ensure it remains accessible. They may need to provide plain-text descriptions or still images as fallbacks for multimedia content, or choose widely supported file formats.
Moreover, producing high-quality multimedia content can be time-consuming and sometimes expensive. Not every doctoral project has access to professional equipment or support. There is a risk that multimodal work could privilege students with greater resources or institutional support. To mitigate this, some graduate programmes are offering training and resources for digital scholarship. They also emphasise that the scholarly content and rationale for using a given mode – rather than production glitz – matters most. Nonetheless, the learning curve can be steep. A biochemistry PhD student, for example, may not have been trained in video editing or graphic design. Taking a multimodal path thus means acquiring new competencies or seeking collaborators.
Crucially, choosing a non-traditional format requires strategic thinking about how to maintain a coherent scholarly narrative. A danger with mixing media is that the work could become disjointed, and the argument might diffuse across modes. It takes skill to ensure that text, images, and other elements complement each other in a unified, logical progression. In practice, successful projects often still have a significant written component that provides the main argumentative spine, with multimedia elements integrated at points where they add clear value. This balance must be carefully managed.
As Lamb’s experience highlights, even he – an advocate of digital dissertations – acknowledged that his approach felt like a compromise. He had to overlay new media onto a fundamentally text-based structure, rather than reinvent the form entirely (Lamb, 2019). Such compromises will likely persist until institutions give full equivalence to non-textual scholarly forms.
Finally, there are disciplinary differences to consider. In the sciences and quantitative social sciences, the traditional journal-style dissertation remains the norm, and text-plus-figures is the expected mode of knowledge delivery. In contrast, arts, design, media studies and some humanities fields are at the forefront of experimenting with multimodal scholarship. This uneven pace of change means that what is acceptable in one field might not yet fly in another. Doctoral candidates must be attuned to their own field’s standards and perhaps act as persuasive ambassadors for new approaches within their departments.
Evolving the PhD in the digital age
Despite these challenges, doctoral education is gradually evolving to embrace a broader definition of scholarly communication. The fundamental goals of a PhD thesis – to demonstrate original research, deep understanding, and a contribution to knowledge – remain the same. Multimodal scholarship does not seek to replace text where text is most effective; rather, it seeks to augment and enhance the communication of ideas. The written word continues to play a central role, but it can now be enriched with complementary modes of expression. As one contributor to the Manifesto for Teaching Online reflected, varied forms of representation can be fully legitimate in academia. The media we use to think and teach should reflect the complexity of the world we study (Bayne et al., 2016).
In practical terms, this means that future PhD students might have more latitude in their thesis format. One could, for example, compose a dissertation that is 70% text and 30% other media – whatever ratio best serves the inquiry – provided it forms a coherent whole.
For universities and supervisors, supporting this evolution will involve updating guidelines and providing training and resources. It also means cultivating open-mindedness about what form scholarly work can take.
Not every project will call for a multimodal approach; in many cases, elegant prose is still the clearest vehicle of thought. But importantly, the option now exists to think outside the textual box.
There is growing evidence that, when done thoughtfully, integrating multiple modes can yield a dissertation. Such a thesis can be both academically rigorous and creatively empowering, enabling doctoral scholars to tell the story of their research in the form it truly deserves.
Ultimately, the push towards multimodal doctoral work is part of a broader trend. It recognises that knowledge in the twenty-first century is constructed and shared through diverse media.
Just as scholarly publishing now encompasses not only journal articles but also data sets, visual essays, and interactive digital projects, so too the apex of university study – the PhD thesis – is opening up.
This transition will continue to provoke debate: purists may worry about diluting standards, while innovators argue it is about keeping scholarship relevant and engaging. If we steer this change carefully, there need be no compromise in quality or depth.
Instead, the dissertation can become a more dynamic document – one that not only reports research but embodies it in multiple dimensions. Such a development is arguably a natural progression for academia in the digital age. We now have at our disposal an expanded palette for intellectual expression. The challenge now is to refine the frameworks that allow this palette to be used to its full potential in doctoral education. We must ensure that future scholars can choose the best tools – textual and beyond – to illuminate their discoveries.
References
- Andrews, R., Borg, E., Davis, S.B., Domingo, M. and England, J. (2012). The SAGE Handbook of Digital Dissertations and Theses. London: SAGE.
- Bayne, S., Knox, J., Ross, J., Macleod, H., O’Shea, C. et al. (2016). Manifesto for Teaching Online (Second edition, 2016). Centre for Research in Digital Education, University of Edinburgh. [Online]. Available at: https://blogs.ed.ac.uk/manifestoteachingonline/the-text/
- Kress, G. (2005). “Gains and losses: New forms of texts, knowledge, and learning.” Computers and Composition, 22(1), 5–22.
- Lamb, J. (2019). “What a digital thesis can look and sound like.” [Blog post]. Dr James Lamb (blog), 19 December 2019. Available at: https://www.james858499.net/blog/what-a-digital-thesis-can-look-and-sound-like
- Marshall, C. (2015). “Doctoral Dissertation as a Graphic Novel: Read a Free Excerpt of Nick Sousanis’ Unflattening.” Open Culture (23 June 2015). Available at: https://www.openculture.com/2015/06/doctoral-dissertation-as-a-graphic-novel-read-a-free-excerpt-of-unflattening.html
- Sousanis, N. (2015). Unflattening. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Tran, A. (2019). Multimodal Dissertations: Opportunities for Multimodality in Higher Education. PhD thesis, University of Western Ontario. Available at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/6228/